The management and leadership

According to John P. Kotter, leadership and management differ in terms of their prima-ry function; the first can produce useful change, the second can create orderly results, which keep something working efficiently. This does not mean that management is nev-er associated with change nor does this mean that leadnev-ership is nevnev-er associated with order. With effective management, an effective leadership process can help produce the changes necessary to bring a chaotic situation under control. Both are needed in order to organisations to prosper. (Kotter 1990 p. 7) Leadership produces change and in cases of effective leadership, the directions of that change is carefully selected in an activity that is at the core of what leadership is all about (Kotter 1990 p. 35). Leadership defines what the future should look like, aligns people with that vision, and inspires them to make it happen despite the obstacles (Kotter 2012 p. 28).

24

It reflects from the interviews that more transparent and clearer role was needed and re-quired from the Company X’s directors during the integration process, and the board of directors were criticised for the lack of leadership. In turn, the directors received acknowledgement for such a bold move to buy three magazines in these unstable eco-nomic times.

I have wondered if the board of directors ever had a cohesive line in this process.

More integrated approach and long-term solutions would have been needed. It always seems that keeping up the appearances is more important that what actu-ally is going on within the walls of Company X… The respect for the board of directors comes from their actions and practices. A leader should lead by his/hers own example. (Excerpt from interview, employee from Company X)

Company X is totally missing content management, and the board of directors is differentiated from the rest of the crew. The board of directors and employees potter around in two separate gangs. Genuine interaction is missing. There is a strange hierarchy, or the approach to management and leadership issues is from the 80s’. Unfortunately the leadership know-how and practices of the chief executive officer don’t stream forward to other directors. The “pseudo-casual-feeling” can’t be seen in practice or in leadership level. (Excerpt from interview, employee from Company Y)

All and all I am very thunderstrucked and disappointed how things have been handled and managed. At Company X I get the feeling that everything and everyone can be replaced. In orations superlatives are flowing, but when it comes to practice, those words does not matter at all. If people do not feel spe-cial and valued when working for Company X, this won’t become that most rec-ommended workplace… It would have been nice to know about the visions for the future and to what direction we should drive our work. At Company Y we had a clear mission and goal, which was pursued together. At Company X this seems to be missing totally. (Excerpt from interview, employee from Company Y)

25

Kotter states that employees in large, older firms often have difficulty getting a trans-formation process started because of the lack of leadership coupled with arrogance, in-sularity and bureaucracy. The problem in such case is that it is difficult to enact by sheer force the big changes often needed today to make organizations perform better. Trans-formation requires sacrifice, dedication and creativity, none of which usually comes by forcing. Without competent management, the transformation process can get out of con-trol, but much bigger challenge is leading change. Only leadership can motivate the ac-tions needed to alter behaviour in any significant way and only leadership can get change to stick by anchoring it in the very culture of an organisation. (Kotter 2012 p.

32-33)

According to Tushman and O’Reilly III, for directors and managers, finding the right strategy, vision and purpose are essential for long-term success, but they also have im-portant motivational features. These features prove to organisational members that the work matters and their efforts are contributing to something worthwhile. A shared vi-sion helps to inspire the organisation with meaning and purpose, and commitment re-quires that people genuinely believe that their efforts contribute to some higher good and make a difference. (Tushman & O’Reilly III 2002 p. 100) A vision that people be-lieve in can add passion and enthusiasm to an organisation, but a vision that people ei-ther do not understand or believe in undermines management’s credibility and is a source of great cynicism (Tushman & O’Reilly III 2002 p. 51).

Evaluation of past change efforts is important for the future decisions. Bordia et al.

states that if a past change is perceived as well managed, it will lead to positive out-comes (for example high levels of trust in the organisation and low levels of cynicism) and on the contrary, if the change is perceived as poorly managed, it will lead to nega-tive outcomes (low levels of trust in the organisation and high levels of cynicism. Bor-dia et al. suggest that the experience of bad change management in the organisation de-velop beliefs that the organisation is bad at managing change. The beliefs will affect reactions to future organisational events including the development of organisation-related attitudes and behaviour. A history of participative decision-making and fairness of procedures, treatment, and outcomes led to greater trust in the leader. (Bordia et al.

2011 pp.195-196)

26

According to Tushman and O’Reilly III the fundamental challenge is to manage the change process to maximise the probability that the organisation gets to its desired fu-ture state, works consistently with its plans, and does so at minimal cost to both the or-ganisation and the employees. To effectively implement change, managers must engage their colleagues and employees emotionally and intellectually. This can require creating crises, building coalitions, and dealing with anxiety and resistance to change. It requires a committed senior team and extended leadership throughout the organisation. (Tush-man & O’Reilly III 2002 p. 211)